Barristers biff blows chambers apart

Solicitors are notorious for being the worst clients, particularly when embroiled in litigation. Barristers, despite their familiarity with the well-trod halls of Queens Square, appear to be even worse.

A barrister recently found himself locked in a dispute with his chambers over alleged unpaid members’ fees.

Frank Santisi was practising at
Ada Evans chambers
from 2007, and signed an agreement to rent chambers from Ada Evans Pty Ltd, ­a company in which colleague
­Michael Maxwell
is the sole director and secretary.

The company is responsible for collecting floor fees, ranging from $1200 to $2000 a month.

But in 2011, Santisi jumped ship, allegedly leaving Ada Evans with an unpaid floor fees debt of about $5000.

It was not an amicable break-up, with Santisi allegedly cancelling a cheque for floor fees and point blank refusing to pay.

The chambers would have none of it and sued in the Downing Centre Local Court.

Things got ugly

Related Quotes

Company Profile

Sounds simple, but alas it was anything but – thanks to the bright legal mind on the other side of the bar table.

Santisi argued that the most recent licence agreement to pay floor fees, from 2009, was not a completed contract as he had made handwritten changes to the document, thereby making it what lawyers commonly refer to as a “counter-offer".

According to Santisi, Maxwell, on behalf of the company, never communicated his acceptance of the counter-offer.

Santisi also filed a cross-claim in excess of $10,000 for services not rendered.

From there, things got ugly.

The case went to a five-day hearing involving transcripts, lengthy submissions and overseas witnesses.

One thing about disputes with lawyers is you can never tell where the penny will fall, and the magistrate found in favour of Santisi, ruling there was no contract and accepting the allegation of misrepresentation on the cross-claim, dishing out a mere $2000 in damages.

But that was only the beginning.

The stoush then evolved into one about legal costs; can a barrister claim his own fees, which was taken to the Supreme Court where Santisi won out.

Incredibly, the court awarded indemnity costs, meaning Santisi was able to claim every dollar rather than the usual 2/3 party party costs due to settlement offers made throughout the proceedings.

The result: Santisi gets his costs of $100,000 paid for by Ada Evans, which also has to foot its own costs.

Hearsay understands the amount has not yet been forthcoming.

Supreme Court judge Christine Adamson was also not impressed, saying “the lack of proportionality between the costs and the amount of the judgment entered against the Chambers is gross".

“It is high time that these proceedings were concluded."

No one ever said barristers weren’t effective billers.

This week brought not only the budget but also the long-awaited hearing of the stoush between television rivals
Seven
and
Ten
and the sought-after executive John “old-dog" Stephens, who defected to Ten and then claimed he was under the influence of pain medication and reverted to his former employer.

The bar table bore a striking resemblance to that which inhabited the courtroom during the early hearings of the stoush between mining magnate billionaire
Gina Rinehart
and her two estranged children, John and Bianca.

Only they had swapped sides.

Senior counsel David Studdy, who appears for Hancock Prospecting in the Rinehart family stoush, instead was acting for Ten as the plaintiffs in the Stepho case.

His opponent was Andrew Bell, SC, none other than the barrister who articulated the breach of trustee case against Rinehart before he was forced to stand aside when third plaintiff and sibling Hope Welker did a deal with her mum and bowed out of actively litigating.

The explosive TV stoush was set down for a two-day hearing, considerably less than the drawn-out Rinehart litigation, which seems like it will never end.

Still, with subpoena arguments and pre-trial stoushes, there is no doubt it would be a nice little pay-day for those involved.

With gruelling hours and a stressful daily life, the legal profession has long been known to have a high instance of mental illness.

It is something that many have grappled with over the years and a difficult thing to combat.

This week, the Tristan Jepson Memorial Foundation launched guidelines to combat depression in the profession in a world first.

A number of high-profile large law firms including Ashurst, K&L Gates and Herbert Smith Freehills signed up to support the endeavour.

The guidelines are aimed at improving the psychological health and wellbeing of lawyers.